Talk:Realm of Memories
Levels I'm not sure if every game is the same or if the actual levels are chosen so I would like some conformation on this. The Realm of Memories is opened by defeating Vaati. The other levels are opened by beating the previous level. The first level is from A Link to the past. The following levels are then Link's Awakening (Monochrome) and then The Legend of Zelda is the final level. Can anybody confirm this order? --Birdman5589 (talk) 03:01, September 29, 2011 (UTC) :More detailed information. *1st: A Link to the Past *#Hyrule Castle garden and exterior *#Inside Hyrule Castle *#Lost Woods (after the Master Sword has been retried, ie. not dark) *2nd: Link's Awakening (monochrome) *#Mysterious Woods, Goponga Swamp, and Koholint Prairie *#Tal Tal Heights and Tal Tal Mountain Range *#Tail Cave *3rd: The Legend of Zelda *#Overworld (South Central) *#Overworld (Western) *#Possibly Level 1? That is how the levels were presented to me. I think these levels might be set unlike the normal levels. --Birdman5589 (talk) 04:23, September 29, 2011 (UTC) Other articles How should we tackle the issue of eventually featuring this in the separate articles for those locations, if at all? I'm sort of against the idea of this turning them into recurring locations, since technically they're the same ones as before, just in a different game. Just a lone The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords section or perhaps an "other appearances/FS subsection" way of doing it may be an idea. --AuronKaizer ' 20:51, September 29, 2011 (UTC) :For me, I think the "other appearances/FS subsection" would be the best. I really don't think it is noteworthy enough for a FS section but a subsection might work. At the same time I'm really don't even know if this even needs to be featured in those location pages. --Birdman5589 (talk) 21:07, September 29, 2011 (UTC) ::They're (heavily) based on old locations yes, but lots of Zelda locations are based on places from other games to some degree. Regardless of similarity, they do recur in another game. I don't see why we shouldn't list in the infobox/categories/etc. that Hyrule Castle appears in FS Anniversary Edition, seeing as, well, it does appear in FS Anniversary Edition. How would one justify taking a location page and completely ignoring the fact that the location does appears in a game?--[[User:Fierce Deku|'Fierce]][[User talk:Fierce Deku|'Deku']] 21:28, September 29, 2011 (UTC) I feel like pointing out that Hebra's Hill and the Lost Hills are pretty much the same area based on function, location and even rock placement. These locations should really be covered in depth but whether it be here or their original articles I think should be based on whether they are actually named Tail Cave and Overworld in game. If not then a brief mention of them directing towards this article would probably suffice. For the ones that are already recurring articles like Hyrule Castle and the Lost Woods it wouldn't hurt to throw in a full section too though. Oni Link 22:02, September 29, 2011 (UTC) :They are actually never named in the game. They just sue maps that are designed after each location listed. They then add elements to those maps to make it a playable stage in the style of the Four Swords game. --Birdman5589 (talk) 22:10, September 29, 2011 (UTC) ::That's what I thought. Since that's the case and they are also exactly the same making recurring articles out of already non recurring pages seems needless. It isn't named Tal Tal Heights so on the most technical level it isn't actually Tal Tal Heights. I think for the current non recurring articles we should just give it a sub section briefly mentioning it. Oni Link 22:16, September 29, 2011 (UTC) :::If they're not actually named, I guess I can sort of see doing an FS section only (sort of like with the Bomb Expansions described on the Bomb Bag page) that mentions the location and links here. However, given that they are unique from other cases in that they are beyond a shadow of a doubt the same locations as Tail Cave/Hyrule Castle/whavever, I'm still not against counting them as recurrences. Keep in mind it is normal for us to extend names from one game to another when it comes to obviously recurring things, such as with various recurring characters who are not named in some games.--[[User:Fierce Deku|'Fierce']][[User talk:Fierce Deku|'Deku']] 22:38, September 29, 2011 (UTC) I don't see any logical explanation not to count the locations as "real appearances." They're in the game. About them being "technically they're the same ones as before," they've been heavily remodeled, but they do bear a strong resemblance to the original areas. The Lost Woods has been remodeled into such a hellhole of spikes and bottomless pits and Gnat Hat-size platforms that I didn't even realize it was supposed to be the Lost Woods. I thought it was simply an entirely new dungeon using Lost Woods graphics.-- 01:03, January 4, 2012 (UTC) To bring the discussion back, I personally find that no matter how you rationalize it, these are meant to be simply cameos with no greater connection to the storylines at hand. Seeing as how if we were to consider the events that occur in the bonus areas as canon, we'd somehow have to include on some Link's Awakening/A Link to the Past/ pages that "another incarnation(s) of Link later returned to Koholint Island, though it had changed considerably and technically did not exist due to the dream having been ended." Now I realize this makes little sense, but so does including this information as canon. --AuronKaizer ''' 02:39, January 4, 2012 (UTC) Encyclopedic Content The fact is that the areas are in the game. It '''does not matter if a prominent Zeldapedia editor dislikes Four Swords, or hasn't played the game, or wishes that these locations weren't in the game. The fact is that they are, and encyclopedic articles must be unbiased, objective, and factual. The opinion of the editors does not matter. Case closed.--Blue Donkey Kong (talk) 02:18, January 4, 2012 (UTC) :Way to miss the point completely. Do try to read the above discussion to get a clearer grip on exactly what's under discussion. --AuronKaizer ' 02:24, January 4, 2012 (UTC) What to do with these palces Ok, we need a final word on this. First off, I'm very strongly of the opinion that we have to list these Realm of Memories appearances on the relevant location pages ''somehow, given the clear connection. I'm also of the opinion that these are obviously supposed to be the places we think they are, and that it is already our policy to extend a name found in one game to something in another game that is obviously supposed to be the same thing. That's why Anju has an Ocarina of Time section, the Triforce has a Twilight Princess section, etc.. If we know what these locations are, and we know they appear in more than one game, I don't understand how we can not treat them as recurring locations. Discuss.--[[User:Fierce Deku|'''Fierce]][[User talk:Fierce Deku|'Deku']] 02:40, January 4, 2012 (UTC) :Has anyone suggested listing these as non-canon appearances? That would not cause the locations to be considered "recurring", but would allow the "cameos" to be mentioned on the appropriate pages. Jedimasterlink (talk) 02:52, January 4, 2012 (UTC) Ok, sorry, I restarted this topic without seeing AK's reopening of it above. People may also want to go read that last post or so of the "Other articles" section. Sorry for the confusion. ANYWAY, given that these are real appearances of certain locations in a Zelda game, it's normal for our wiki to mention those appearances on the locations' pages. The question now seems to be whether to do this normally, or whether they can be considered noncanonical and put in a noncanon section as Jedi said. I have not played the game so I don't know, but I'm under the impression that you actually go to a map screen location called the Realm of Memories, and with no indication that canon is now being breached, you enter the levels. Maybe it's a weird portal to other times/places, maybe it's a weird dream world in which you relive alternate versions of other Links' memories, I don't know. Just the fact that it looks like other games though doesn't really convince me that it's not canon.--[[User:Fierce Deku|'Fierce']][[User talk:Fierce Deku|'Deku']] 03:06, January 4, 2012 (UTC) By the way, we can always give it regular sections but still mention in them that because how the locations is being accessed is unknown, they look like different graphical styles, and because it is bonus rerelease content, that it is potentially considered noncanon. Also note that the Master Sword article currently lists the FS: Anniversary appearance in a normal way as if it's canon.--[[User:Fierce Deku|'Fierce']][[User talk:Fierce Deku|'Deku']] 03:13, January 4, 2012 (UTC) I'm feeling quite neutral towards this issue but I would like to comment on the canonical status of it. This area can only be accessed after the game ends, during these levels there are four Links even though at the end of the game the four Links fuse back into one. Which would mean for it to make sense in canon Link must have randomly decided to have split himself into four again and then explored some new areas. Not to mention as AK put it him exploring any part of Link's Awakening can't make much canon sense since the dream doesn't exist after the game Oni Link 14:10, January 4, 2012 (UTC)